professional in the course of practicing the professional's profession

shall not constitute use for a commercial purpose.

North Carolina

Guidelines for Managing Public Records

Produced by Information Technology Systems

Published by

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources

Division of Archives & History

July 1995

Contents

Introduction ii

I. Applicability of Suggested Guidelines and Self-Warranty 1

II. Definitions 1

A. Information Technology System 1

B. Process or System 1

C. Record 1

D. Public Record 1

E. Electronic Record 1

F. Original Record 1

G. Duplicate Record 2

III. Use of Records Prepared by Information Technology Systems in Legal Proceedings

A. Rules of Evidence 2

B. Laying a Proper Foundation 2

C. Life Expectancy of Media and Admissibility of Records 3

D. Admissibility of Records Transferred or Converted to Another Medium 3

IV. Records Quality Criteria 3

V. Characteristics of the Process or System Used to Prepare Records 3

A. Records Produced As Part of a Regularly Conducted Activity 4

B. Accuracy 4

C. Timeliness 4

VI. Components of the Process or System Used to Prepare Records 4

A. Procedures 4

B. Training Programs 5

C. Audit Trails 5

D. Audits 5

VII. Documentation 6

A. Content 6

B. Retention 6

VIII. Availability of Process or System for Outside Inspection 7

IX. Legal Status of Records Offered as Evidence 7

Appendix A: Excerpts of Relevant North Carolina General Statutes 8

Appendix B: Electronic Records Production Control Self-Warranty 12

Introduction

A critical need by government agencies for more efficient methods for the creation,
storage, and retrieval of public records has led to the adoption of varied information
technology systems for managing records. These include optical disk and CD ROM systems as
well as more established media such as microform and magnetic disk and tape. While the
advantages of such systems are many, the complexity of safeguarding the integrity of
records has increased, requiring greater attention to issues relating to security,
accuracy, reliability, and accountability.

This publication provides North Carolina state, county, and municipal agencies, and
other subdivisions of government suggested guidelines for establishing methods and
procedures in the preparation of records produced by information technology systems.
Implementation of the guidelines should increase the reliability and accuracy of records
regardless of the type of storage media employed, thereby enhancing their admissibility
and acceptance by the courts as being trustworthy. Admissibility of printouts of optical
disk or CD ROM files is yet to be widely tested, but it is expected that they will be
treated similarly to printouts from magnetic disk or tape files, i.e., accepted as
originals if it is shown that they reflect the data accurately. Appendix A contains
excerpts of relevant North Carolina statutes, and Appendix B describes an electronic
records production self-warranty process and includes a model warranty form.

The suggested guidelines and self-warranty are expected to serve as a basis for
establishing State standards in the future. While not now required, it is suggested that
agencies employing an information technology system consider their implementation. The
model form in Appendix B may be reproduced by agencies choosing to begin warranting the
production of electronic records.

Nothing in this publication or the appendixes changes current records retention and

Agencies may obtain a copy of this publication from the State at no charge.

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources Tel: 919/733-7305

Division of Archives and History Fax: 919/733-8807

109 East Jones Street

Raleigh, NC 27601-2807

The North Carolina guidelines are based on those contained in the Association for
Information and Image Management (AIIM) technical report series, Performance Guidelines
for the Legal Acceptance of Records Produced by Information Technology Systems (AIIM
Catalog No. TR31). The technical reports may be purchased from AIIM.

Association for Information and Image Management Tel: 301/587-8202

1100 Wayne Avenue, Suite 1100 Fax: 301/587-2711

Silver Spring, MD 20910

The statutes reprinted or quoted verbatim in the following pages are taken from the
General Statutes of North Carolina, Copyright 1994, by the Michie Company, a division of
Reed Elsevier Inc. and Reed Elsevier Properties Inc. and are reprinted with the permission
of The Michie Company. All rights reserved.

I. Applicability of Suggested Guidelines and Self-Warranty

These suggested guidelines are designed to be applicable to public records produced by
any information technology system, as the term is defined below, regardless of the
physical characteristics of the record media or technology employed. The suggested
self-warranty certification (Appendix B) is designed for officials with responsibility for
electronic records. Electronic record also is defined below.

II. Definitions

A. Information Technology System: Any process or system that employs a mechanical,
photo-optical, magnetic, electronic, or other technological device for producing or
reproducing records.

B. Process or System: Any information technology system.

C. Record: Information preserved by any technique in any medium, now known or later
developed, that can be recognized by ordinary human sensory capabilities either directly
or with the aid of technology.

D. Public Record: Chapter 132, section 132-1, of the North Carolina General Statutes
defines public records as meaning ". . .all documents, papers, letters, maps, books,
photographs, films, sound recordings, magnetic or other tapes, electronic data-processing
records, artifacts, or other documentary material, regardless of physical form or
characteristics, made or received pursuant to law or ordinance in connection with the
transaction of public business by any agency of North Carolina government or its
subdivisions. Agency of North Carolina government or its subdivisions shall mean and
include every public office, public officer or official (State or local, elected or
appointed), institution, board, commission, bureau, council, department, authority or
other unit of government of the State or of any county, unit, special district or other
political subdivision of government." (See Appendix A for excerpts of other relevant
North Carolina statutes.)

E. Electronic Record: A record created or reproduced in any medium by means of any
system requiring the aid of electronic technology to make the record readable or otherwise
comprehensible by ordinary human sensory capabilities. (This definition does not apply to
microform records, which can be read with the aid of a magnifying glass.)

F. Original Record: A record prepared in the first instance or any counterpart intended
to have the same effect by a person executing or issuing it. If data are stored in a
computer or similar device, any printout or other output readable by sight shown to
reflect the data accurately is an "original."

Original records preserve information over time in the identical or functionally
equivalent form to the original information. Original records may present information in a
form different from the original information without affecting its quality. For example,
information preserved in digital format may be printed on paper using different print
fonts at different times.

G. Duplicate Record: A record that is produced by the same impression as the original,
or from the same matrix, or by any other technique that accurately reproduces the
original.

Duplicate records accurately reproduce original records, except that duplicates may
contain production, control, indexing, certification, or other data not related to
informational content of the records and which do not affect the content of the records.

Image enhancement techniques may be used provided that they do not change the
information content of the records.

Note: Classifying electronic records as either originals or duplicates may have little
practical value; the reliability and accuracy of the process or system used to produce the
records will likely be a more important consideration by the courts in determining whether
or not to admit them into evidence. (Many such records can be expected to have indexing or
other control data added for purposes of location and retrieval, making them duplicates by
definition.)

III. Use of Records Prepared by Information Technology Systems in Legal Proceedings

A. Rules of Evidence. Modern rules of evidence are based on statutes and special rules
prescribed by the courts, rather than on individual court decisions. The federal
government follows the Federal Rules of Evidence while most states have adopted one or
more uniform laws that establish the admissibility of records in evidence such as the
Uniform Business Records Act, the Uniform Photographic copies of Business and Public
Records as Evidence Act, and the Uniform Rules of Evidence. North Carolina statutes have
incorporated language accomplishing a similar result.

B. Laying a Proper Foundation. Now, rules of evidence permit original and duplicate
records to be admitted into evidence provided that a proper foundation is laid by a
showing that the records are authentic.

Laying a foundation is "the practice or requirement of introducing evidence of
things necessary to make further evidence relevant, material or competent. . ."
(Black's Law Dictionary). For example, visible records produced with a computer in the
form of computer printouts or computer output microfilm (COM) are considered originals if
an appropriate witness convinces the court that they accurately reflect the information in
the computer files. Information processing methods commonly employed in the business world
are readily accepted as reliable, while new information system technologies are subject to
greater scrutiny.

C. Life Expectancy of Media and Admissibility of Records. The life expectancy of the
media per se has no bearing on the admissibility of the records maintained on the media.
This means that for some technologies it may be necessary to periodically convert,
regenerate, copy, or transfer the records from one medium or technology to another in
order to preserve them.

D. Admissibility of Records Transferred or Converted to Another Medium. The transfer or
conversion of records from one medium or technology to another should not affect their
admissibility as evidence provided that quality and accuracy do not functionally change.
Procedures followed during the transfer or conversion should be carefully documented.

IV. Records Quality Criteria

The following features of a record should appear with sufficient clarity so that each
can

* Other features of records such as color, shape, texture, etc., that relate to the
content

of the information

In other words, a record should be legible, accurate, and complete in that all features
essential to an accurate reading or comprehension of the record should be present.

V. Characteristics of the Process or System Used to Prepare Records

Certain characteristics of an information technology system used to prepare records
ensure the accuracy of the information. The presence of these characteristics demonstrates
that the process or system is reliable and accurate, hence capable of producing
trustworthy records.

A. Records Produced As Part of a Regularly Conducted Activity. Records produced in he
regular course of business are admissible if it can be established that the process or
system used to produce them is reliable and accurate. A regularly conducted activity may
include a regular pattern of activity to produce the records on a daily, weekly, monthly,
yearly, or other cyclical schedule.

A regularly conducted activity may also include records created as part of a regular
program of the organization, but at irregular times. For example, when a planned program
results in the one time reproduction of records created prior to a specific year, this
will be viewed as a program proceeding in the regular course of business, even though the
reproduction only occurred once.

B. Accuracy. Records produced by methods to ensure or enhance accuracy will be more
readily admissible in evidence. This process may include systematic quality control and
audit procedures, as well as operational oversight by someone with detailed knowledge of
the process or system used to produce the records.

C. Timeliness. Records produced within a short period after the event or activity
occurs tend to be more readily acceptable as accurate than records produced long after the
event or activity. However, a challenge to admissibility of a later-produced record can be
overcome by a showing that the time lapse had no effect on the record's contents. For
example, a computer printout of a statistical report produced annually in the regular
course of business can be shown to accurately consolidate data compiled over the course of
a year.

VI Components of the Process or System Used to Prepare Records

The components of a process or system can be reviewed to determine how well the
preparation of records is controlled. The admissibility of records can successfully be
defended from challenge to the trustworthiness of the process if the process or system
includes adequate procedures, training programs, audit trails, and audits.

A. Procedures. The establishment of procedures through the use of detailed steps to be
followed when creating, modifying, duplicating, destroying, or otherwise managing records
provide for consistent quality control, problem resolution, and other activities that
might otherwise be subject to inconsistent action, multiple interpretation, or
misinterpretation.

Established procedures demonstrate what an organization plans to do in managing and
controlling the process or system--as opposed to what it actually does. The
trustworthiness of an organization's records offered in evidence might well be judged by
the established procedures and how closely they are followed. Deviations can be expected
to be closely scrutinized, especially if the deviations are from legally required
procedures.

B. Training Programs. Formal training programs for staff on details of the system
procedures raise a strong presumption that the procedures were correctly followed. If an
organization can show the court that staff knew what procedures they were supposed to
follow, it can also show that there is a high likelihood that the procedures were in fact
followed.

C. Audit Trails. Audit trails document how the records were created, modified, stored,
and reported, who used the system, when they used it, what they did while using the
system, and what were the results. Properly implemented audit trails can automatically
detect who had access to the system, whether staff followed standard procedures or whether
fraud or other unauthorized acts occurred or might be suspected. They provide independent
confirmation that proper procedures were in fact followed.

D. Audits. Audits performed periodically confirm that the process or system produces
accurate results. Audits must compare the procedures stated in the procedure's
documentation with procedures actually followed. They confirm that the process or system
adheres to this guideline.

The term audits as used here is different from quality control specified in most system
procedures. Quality control can be performed by individuals creating the records to verify
the accuracy at the time of creation. This ensures the accuracy of the system for
operational purposes.

Audits may be used to confirm the accuracy of the process or system for purposes of
admissibility of records in evidence. When ruling on the admissibility of the records,
courts may require that audits be performed by an independent source (i.e., persons other
than those who created the records or persons without an interest in the content of the
records, such as a trained auditor having organization-wide audit responsibilities).

No particular method of auditing is required for a record, original or duplicate, to be
admitted as evidence. Audits should be designed to evaluate the process or system's
accuracy, timeliness, adequacy of procedures, training provided, and the existence of
audit trails.

For purposes of original records, audits also should focus on whether the records
incorporate the information of the acts, events, or activities leading to the record.

For duplicates, audits also should confirm that the duplicates accurately reproduce the
originals. This normally involves comparing statistically valid samplings of originals to
their corresponding reproductions prior to any destruction of the originals.

VII. Documentation

Documentation of the process or system provides an enduring verification of the process
or system followed to produce or reproduce the records. Without documentation, witnesses
must rely solely on memory--a form of evidence that, over time, becomes less trustworthy
and susceptible to contradiction. Documentation preserves the information about the
process or system independent of the individuals involved and can be used to prepare
exhibits to guide witness testimony. Generally speaking, the documentation can be
introduced into evidence for the jury to scrutinize during their deliberations.

A. Content. A knowledgeable person should prepare and maintain documentation for the
process or system used to produce the records. Documentation should be complete and
up-to-date. This enables staff to be aware of and follow the most current procedures. It
also ensures that reliable system documentation is immediately available if needed for
court proceedings. Documentation should be sufficient to demonstrate the steps required to
get from the beginning to the end of the process and should describe the system hardware
and software. In some proceedings, a general, non-technical description of the process or
system will be sufficient. In others, more detailed documentation may be required by the
courts, including verification that any equipment or software involved operated properly
at the time the records were produced.

Training documentation should include documentation of distribution of the written
procedures, course materials, attendance of individuals at training sessions, remedial or
refresher training programs, certifications of training completion, and other relevant
information, including dates.

Actual audit trail records demonstrate what activities actually took place as part of
the process or system. The actual audit reports indicate whether the statistically valid
sampling of records produced accurate results and what remedial procedures were followed
if the expected level of accuracy was not achieved.

For purposes of laying a foundation for admissibility of records in evidence, actual
system procedures followed during the period that the records in question were produced
should be maintained in sufficient detail to enable a qualified witness (e.g., the records
custodian) to rely on the documentation in describing the process or system to the court.
The documentation should explain what should have been done, and what was actually done,
and explain any deviations from standard procedures. The training, audit trail, and audit
documentation should also be presented to confirm the accuracy of the process or system.

B. Retention. At least one set of documentation should be maintained during the period
for which the records produced by the process or system could likely be subject to court
review. When the documentation changes, the old versions should continue to be maintained
for the requisite period. The court will determine the admissibility of the records in
evidence based on the accuracy of the process or system in effect at the time the records
were produced.

VIII. Availability of Process or System for Outside Inspection.

The courts encourage pretrial discovery of computer programs and related materials,
recognizing that such information facilitates effective cross-examination. The guideline
applies this principle to records produced by any information systems technology.

The process or system used to produce or reproduce records introduced into evidence is
subject to outside inspection by opposing parties and the court. Outside inspection may
include:

Review of procedures documentation

Review of system operation

Independent inspection and quality control tests

Independent audit

Testing of process or system operation

Review of equipment design and software documentation

Review of training programs

Any other matter related to the operation of the process or system

If the records were produced on the current or substantially similar system, access to
the system may be required to be provided to outside parties upon request to process their
own test data. If the system used to produce the records no longer exits, any existing
documentation described above must be made available. Failure to produce pertinent
documentation because it no longer exists may jeopardize admissibility of the records if
their trustworthiness cannot otherwise be established.

In sum, the hardware and software used and any relevant step of the process or system
can be reviewed by the outside party.

IX. Legal Status of Records Offered as Evidence.

When determining the admissibility of records into evidence, the court will consider
the reliability and accuracy of the process or system used to produce or reproduce the
records. The particular form or format of the records shall have no bearing on their legal
status regarding admissibility. Likewise, the destruction of original records after
reproduction shall not affect the legal status of duplicate records regarding their
admissibility.

All that is required for records to be deemed admissible is a prima facie showing that
the process or system is trustworthy in terms of producing an accurate result. Once the
records are admitted, the trustworthiness of their content will remain subject to
challenge. For example, a computer printout of a record is admissible if it is shown to be
an accurate reflection of the source data used to create the record, but this does not
mean the source data is necessarily correct.

Appendix A

Excerpts of Relevant North Carolina General Statutes

Chapter 121.

Archives and History

G.S. 121-4 Powers and duties of the Department of Cultural Resources.

(2) To conduct a records management program, including the operation of a records
center or centers and a centralized microfilming program, for the benefit of all State
agencies, and to give advice and assistance to the public officials and agencies in
matters pertaining to the economica and efficient maintenance and preservation of public
records.

G.S. 121-5. Public records and archives.

(a) State Archival Agency Designated. - The Department of Cultural Resources shall be
the official archival agency of the State of North Carolina with authority as provided
throughout this Chapter and Chapter 132 of the General Statutes of North Carolina in
relation to the public records of the State, counties, municipalities, and other
subdivisions of government.

(b) (Effective October 1, 1994) Destruction of Records Regulated. - No person may
destroy, sell, loan, or otherwise dispose of any public record without the consent of the
Department of Cultural Resources. Whoever unlawfully removes a public record from the
office where it is usually kept, or alters, mutilates, or destroys it shall be guilty of a
Class 3 misdemeanor and upon conviction only fined at the discretion of the court.

Chapter 132.

Public Records

G.S. 132-1. "Public records" defined.

"Public record" or "public records" shall mean all documents,
papers, letters, maps, books, photographs, films, sound recordings, magnetic or other
tapes, electronic data-processing records, artifacts, or other documentary material,
regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received pursuant to law or
ordinance in connection with the transaction of public business by any agency of North
Carolina government or its subdivisions. Agency of North Carolina government or its
subdivisions shall mean and include every public office, public officer or official (State
or local, elected or appointed), institution, board, commission, bureau, council,
department, authority or other unit of government of the State or of any county, unit,
special district or other political subdivision of government.

(a) Prohibition. - No public official may destroy, sell, loan, or otherwise dispose of
any public record, except in accordance with G.S. 121-5, without the consent of the
Department of Cultural Resources. Whoever unlawfully removes a public record from the
office where it is usually kept, or alters, defaces, mutilates or destroys it shall be
guilty of a Class 3 misdemeanor and upon conviction only fined not less than ten dollars
($10.00) nor more than five hundred dollars ($500.00).

A records management program for the application of efficient and economical management
methods to the creation, utilization, maintenance, retention, preservation, and disposal
of official records shall be administered by the Department of Cultural Resources. It
shall be the duty of that Department, in cooperation with and with the approval of the
Department of Administration, to establish standards, procedures, and techniques for
effective management of public records, to make continuing surveys of paper work
operations, and to recommend improvements in current records management practices
including the use of space, equipment, and supplies employed in creating, maintaining, and
servicing records. It shall be the duty of the head of each State agency and the governing
body of each county, municipality and other subdivision of government to cooperate with
the Department of Cultural Resources in conducting surveys and to establish and maintain
an active, continuing program for the economical and efficient management of the records
of said agency, county, municipality, or other subdivision of government.

G.S. 132-8.2. Selection and preservation of records considered essential; making or
designation of preservation duplicates; force and effect of duplicates or copies thereof.

In cooperation with the head of each State agency and the governing body of each
county, municipality, and other subdivision of government, the Department of Cultural
Resources shall establish and maintain a program for the selection and preservation of
public records considered essential to the operation of government and to the protection
of the rights and interests of persons, and, within the limitations of funds available for
the purpose, shall make or cause to be made preservation duplicates or designate as
preservation duplicates existing copies of such essential public records. Preservation
duplicates shall be durable, accurate, complete and clear, and such duplicates made by a
photographic, photostatic, microfilm, micro card, miniature photographic, or other process
which accurately reproduces and forms a durable medium for so reproducing the original
shall have the same force and effect for all purposes as the original record whether the
original record is in existence or not. A transcript, exemplification, or certified copy
of such preservation duplicate shall be deemed for all purposes to be a transcript,
exemplification, or certified copy of the original record. Such preservation duplicates
shall be preserved in the place and manner of safekeeping prescribed by the Department of
Cultural Resources.

Chapter 8, Article 3

Public Records

G.S. 8-34. Copies of official writings.

Copies of all official bonds, writings, papers, or documents, recorded or filed as
records in any court, or public office, or lodged in the office of the Governor,
Treasurer, Auditor, Secretary of State, Attorney General, Adjutant General, or the State
Department of Cultural Resources, shall be as competent evidence as the originals, when
certified by the keeper of such records or writings under the seal of his office when
there is such seal, or under his hand when there is no such seal, unless the court shall
order the production of the original. Copies of the records of the board of county
commissioners shall be evidence when certified by the clerk of the board under his hand
and seal of the county.

Certification of Copy. - The power of an officer, who is the keeper of certain public
records, to certify copies is confined to a certification of their contents as they appear
by the records themselves, and the records must, therefore, be so certified, for he has no
authority to certify to the substance of them, nor that any particular fact, as a date,
appears on them. Wiggins v. Rogers, 175 N.C. 67, 94 S.E. 685 (1917).

If any business, institution, member of a profession or calling, or any department or
agency of government, in the regular course of business or activity has kept or recorded
any memorandum, writing, entry, print, representation, X ray or combination thereof, of
any act, transaction, occurrence or event, and in the regular course of business has
caused any or all of the same to be recorded, copied or reproduced by any photographic,
photostatic, microfilm, microcard, miniature photographic, or other process which
accurately reproduces or forms a durable medium for so reproducing the original, the
original may be destroyed in the regular course of business unless held in a custodial or
fiduciary capacity or unless its preservation is required by law. Such reproduction, when
satisfactorily identified, is as admissible in evidence as the original itself in any
judicial or administrative proceeding whether the original is in existence or not and an
enlargement or facsimile of such reproduction is likewise admissible in evidence if the
original reproduction is in existence and available for inspection under direction of
court.

The introduction of a reproduced record, enlargement or facsimile, does not preclude
admission of the original.

Editor's Note. -- Notwithstanding the above citation, G.S. 121-5 (b) and G.S. 132-3 (a)
require the consent of the Department of Cultural Resources before any public record,
original or copy, may be destroyed.

CASE NOTES

Admissibility of "Written Hearsay". - North Carolina countenances the
introduction of test results, certified copies of official documents and records, as well
as other writings, which, but for statute or decisional authority, would be written
hearsay. In re Arthur, 27 N.C. App. 227, 218 S.E.2d 869 (1975), rev'd on other grounds,
291 N.C. 640, 231 S.E.2d 614 (1977).

Evidence Reproductions Are Primary. - Reproductions are made and kept among the records
of many banks in due course of business. Their accuracy is not questioned. As proof of
payment they constitute not secondary but primary evidence. State v. Shumaker, 251 N.C.
678, 111 S.E.2d 878 (1960). Photostatic copies of deposit slips and checks made by an
employee of a bank in the usual course of business and identified by such employee are
competent as primary evidence without proof of the loss or destruction of the originals.
Jones v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 5 N.C. App. 570, 169 S.E.2d 6 (1969).

Business records are admissible as an exception to the hearsay rule when they (1) are
made in the regular course of business, at or near the time of the events recorded; (2)
are original entries; (3) are based on the personal knowledge of the individual making the
entries; and (4) are authenticated by a witness familiar with the system by which they
were made. Pinner v. Southern Bell Tel. & Tel. Co., 60 N.C. App. 257, 298 S.E.2d 749,
cert. denied, 308 N.C. 387, 302 S.E.2d 253 (1983).

Failure to Show That Copy Was Made in Regular Course of Business or by Whom It Was
Made. - A photostatic copy of a purported written designation of plaintiff by deceased as
the beneficiary of deceased's governmental life insurance benefits should not be admitted
as evidence where plaintiff failed to show that the copy was made in the regular course of
business or activity of any federal agency or by whom it was made. Jones v. Metropolitan
Life Ins. Co., 5 N.C. App. 570, 169 S.E.2d 6 (1969).

Appendix B

Electronic Records Production Control Self-Warranty

Purpose of Self-Warranty

The increased complexity of safeguarding the integrity of public records produced by
means of information technology requires greater attention to issues relating to security,
accuracy, reliability, and accountability. The Electronic Records Production Control
Self-Warranty is designed to be used as a self-evaluation tool in an effort to ensure that
electronic records produced by state, county, and municipal agencies, and other
subdivisions of government are created, reproduced, and otherwise managed in accordance
with guidelines that will enhance their reliability and accuracy.

Implementation Suggested but Not Required

While the warranting of electronic records, as the term is defined below and in section
II of the guidelines, is suggested, it is not now required. Agencies choosing to begin the
process may reproduce the model self-warranty form. It should be signed by the agency
records officer or other responsible official and retained by the originating agency. The
warranties should be made available to records analysts and auditors.

Limitation of Self-Warranty

The self-warranting of records in itself does not authorize the destruction of records,
originals or copies, nor does it change current records retention and disposition
scheduling procedures.

Self-Warranty Based on Guidelines Publication

The self-warranty form is based on the suggested guidelines set forth in this
publication. A copy of the guidelines can be obtained by contacting the Division of
Archives and History of the North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, 109 East
Jones Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807, telephone no. (919)733-7305, fax no.
(919)733-8807.

Authority

Chapters 121 and 132 of the North Carolina General Statutes define public records and
assign responsibility for regulating their preservation and destruction to the Department
of Cultural Resources. This responsibility is carried out through the Archives and Records
Section of the Division of Archives and History. Under this program, the section analyzes
the records created by state agencies, counties, municipalities, and other subdivisions of
government, prepares records retention and disposition schedules, maintains the State
Archives, and provides services related to records retention and disposal. It is
contemplated that at some time in the future the Division will use the suggested
guidelines and self-warranty in creating rules which would be applicable to electronic
records with regard to the Division's duties under Chapters 121 and 132.

Electronic Record Defined

Electronic Record is defined as a record created or reproduced in any medium by means
of any system requiring the aid of electronic technology to make the record readable or
otherwise comprehensible by ordinary human sensory capabilities. (This definition does not
apply to microform records, which can be read with the aid of a magnifying glass.)

Responsibility for Ensuring Integrity of Electronic Records

The government agency producing electronic records and/or reproductions is responsible
for ensuring their authenticity and accuracy. The State Archives and Records Section is in
no position to certify the authenticity and accuracy of any records, whether originals or
reproductions, produced by the originating agency.